Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Colonization Love and “Logic,” September 8, 1838

Abolition Logic

“Not hate of one's neighbor.” We prove it to be hate, because it wants to send off. Hatred repels, and would expel. Love attracts, draws, wishes to detain. Colonization proposes to rid the land of colored people. It therefore, cannot love them. Its love is mere pretence. — Herald of Freedom.

This argument, poor as it is, with hardly speciousness enough to deceive a sensible boy of six years old, is the same that was used by George Thompson, in our debate with him in Boston. But how will this argument work? A New Hampshire father sends off his son to make his fortune on the rich lands of the West. Therefore he hates him. A Boston merchant sends off his son to Europe or the East Indies, that he may extend his schemes of enterprise, and acquire wealth. Therefore he hales him. We send off missionaries to barbarous nations, that they may extend the blessings of Christianity, and receive in a future world the rewards of those that turn many to righteousness. Therefore we hate these missionaries. The consent of those who depart seems to make no difference in the view of this sage editor. “We prove it to be hate because it wants to send off.”

It is a little ludicrous that the editor of the Herald should actually kill his own argument, even before he reaches the bottom of his column. “It won't hurt a slave to send him to Africa. It won't, to send him any where out of the infernal regions. We had rather he might get to Canada, — but if he can't go there — or to the West Indies — or to England — or France — or Spain, or Turkey, or Algiers — or any other comparatively free country under heaven — why, rather than remain in America, among our Colonizationists, let him go to Liberia — or to the bottom of the sea — or to the sharks. No monster of the deep would devour him with the cruel tooth of our republicanism.”

He also proposes, in another article, to colonize slaves in Canada. Seriously, we think there are strong indications of insanity in the Herald.

The above is from the Rev. R. R. Gurley, Secretary and chief engineer of the American Colonization Society — that grand "American system” of machinery for clearing this country of free colored people, by a sort of suction-pump force, called “consent.” They say, however, the “Niggers” come hard; and though the pump draws upon them, like doctor's instruments upon a tooth, yet they stick to the soil like a lamprey eel to the rocks; and though the Secretary “hangs on like a dog to a root,” they “hang back, like a dog going to the gallows.” Resist sternly, colored friends! “Abide in the ship.” The land shall soon be indeed your country and your home. Lay your bones in it. Your tyrants and persecutors will go and evangelize Africa, themselves, when they really wish her evangelized.

The wily Secretary has ventured upon a little article of ours, with true Tracy philology and word-hunting. “Send off.” The magnificent “statesman” here finds a field for the scope of his continental philanthropy. The argument, he says, is the same that was used by George Thompson. All the better for that. George Thompson is an authority. He is a mm of instinctive and intuitive judgment on this question. But it is a poor argument, says the Secretary, “with hardly speciousness enough to deceive a sensible school boy of six years old.” Any argument is always poor in the eyes of the Secretary, that is clear “of speciousness and false show, and that can't deceive sensible school boys. We don't intend to use specious arguments,— “showy, plausible, superficially not solidly right,” as Walker defines them! The Secretary had better not use any more of them. “Fair play is a jewel.”

“How will this argument work?” Try it and see, Secretary.

You don't try it. You put different cases. You speak of farmers sending away sons for their benefit and fortunes. We speak of sending off — a sending off to get rid of. Farmers don't send off their sons, unless they get angry, and forget their nature, and disinherit them. Then they send them off. This sending to the West is not true in fact. The sons want to go from New Hampshire rocks to the prairied West. They have heard stories about it almost as extravagant and false as the Secretary tells about the death-haunted capes of Liberia, where bones lie bleaching as they do in the valley of the fabled Upas. The father wants them to stay with him, if he has got land for them, and if he han't, he would go with them. That is the way the father sends off his sons. Does the Secretary send off the dear colored people so?  Would he accompany them? Let him go and edit at Cape Palmas, and sing his ditty of the “African steeples” about among king Joe Harris' people. They would admire his tall presence and his fine head, as the Cossacks did Murat on his black charger. No. The Secretary loves —  “society,” that has got more “frame-work” in it. The dragon take Liberia, for all his going there! It is a grand country for “free niggers;” but the Secretary belongs to another race.

“The Boston merchant sends off his son,” &c. Whoever heard of such a sending off? Would the weeping father, as the vessel, with his dear boy on board, was clearing the harbor and standing out into the wide sea, tell the disconsolate mother and the brothers and sisters — all in tears — “I've sent off Charles?” Sent him off! for shame, Secretary! If you had instanced a Boston merchant, who had a poor, miserable, profligate, drunken, prodigal son, that had exhausted his paternal nature, and forged his name to checks — whom he did not wish to see hanged at home, for the disgrace it would bring on the family, and he had shipped him aboard a man-of-war for the Mediterranean — or a whaler for a three years' chance among the storms of the cape, and the grampuses of the arctic circle, peradventure to come back, and peradverture not, then you might talk of a father's sending his son off. But that comes too near colonizing, for the Secretary's purpose, — only he wants to ship the innocent — the blameless — the unoffending — guilty of nothing but want of the roseate hue of the beauteous, Absalom-looking Secretary.

“We send off missionaries,” &c. Only to Liberia, Secretary. We send out to every other quarter. Note this peculiarity, reader, in our American efforts to evangelize the world. We send out white, educated, college-learned, beneficiary, Andover-finished theologians to those people we have never enslaved; and to our old human hunting-ground we send off  “abated nuisances,” called “free niggers,” — sent off “with their own consent.”  (“He ’ticed him out of the field,” says the witness; “’ticed him clear out.” How did he ’tice him? said the court. “O, he 'ticed him with a pitchfork.’”) We had the curiosity to look, in this very number of the Secretary's “Statesman,” to see what he called the sending of missionaries. He has a deal to say about love to the heathen. We lit upon “Missions to Liberia,” the first thing almost. It is not the Secretary's own, but his faithful Achates, R. McDowell's. He gives us the very technical phrase for missionary sending; but there is no off to it. “The first mission, established in Liberia,” says McD., “was the Swiss mission, &c., sent out by Rev. Dr. Bleinhardt,” &c.

Don't talk of sending off sons and missionaries, any more, Mr. Secretary. It is too “specious.”

The Secretary says, we “ludicrously kill our argument before we get down our column.” What is our argument? That sending off our free colored people, to rid the country of them, is proof of hatred towards them. How do we kill it? Why, by saying it won't hurt a slave to send him away. Commend us to such killing. “What is sauce for the goose, may be for the” Secretary; but it don't follow, that what is bad for the freeman, would be bad for the slave. Would it be good for the freeman of America to be sent to Algiers? We say it would not hurt the slave to be sent there. He would rejoice to get there, and we should rejoice to have him, if we can't free him here,—even to Liberia—rather than stay within influence of such teachers of humanity as McDufie and Gurley.

The Secretary's mention of our proposal to colonize the slaves in Canada, as a serious proposal, is so roguishly “specious,” that we can't answer it. — The charge of “insanity,” abolitionists are used to. The Secretary will be glad to be so, by and by, when we get slavery down in this country. The cry from the West Indies makes him look wild. He will exclaim, by another year or two, when Congress, with old John Quincy Adams at their head, and Alvan Stewart and Wendell Phillips and Vermont Knapp to back him up, declare slavery down in the capital and the' district — he will then cry out, as Atlialiah did, when she “heard the noise of the guard, the clapping of hands, and the God save king Joash.” He will be stark crazy then, — if he does not repent — which we hope he may.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 21-5 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of September 8, 1838.

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Constitutionality of Slavery, September 8, 1838

The second “unprovided-for difficulty” of the Keene Sentinel, in the way of the anti-slavery movement is, that “slaves are property.” We deny that they are property, or that they can be made so. We will not argue this, for it is self-evident. A man cannot be a subject of human ownership; neither can he be the owner of humanity. There is a clear and eternal incompetancy on both sides, — on the one to own man, and on the other to be owned by man. A man cannot alienate his right to liberty and to himself, — still less can it be taken from him. He cannot part with his duty to be free — his obligation to liberty, any more than his right. He is under obligation to God and humanity and his own immortality, to retain his manhood and to exercise it. He cannot become the property of another, any more than he can part with his human nature. It would be utterly repugnant to all the purposes of his creation. He is bound to perform a part, which is totally incompatible with his being owned by any body but himself; which requires that he keep himself free. He can't be property, any more than he can be a horse, or a literal ass. We commend our brethren of the Sentinel to the eighth Psalm, as a divine authority touching the nature and destination of man. He can't be property — he can't be appropriated. His mighty nature cannot be coped by the grasp of ownership. Can the Messrs. Sentinel be appropriated? We put it sternly to them, in behalf of their, and our own, and the slave's common nature, — for we feel that it is all outraged by their terrible allegation. Can the editors of the Sentinel become property? the goods and chattels, rights and hereditaments of an owner? If they can't, no man can. If any man can, they can. Can the Hon. Mr. Prentiss, with all his interesting qualities and relations, by any diabolical jugglery, be converted into a slave, so as to belong to one of his fallen, depraved fellow-men? Can he suppose the idea? Is he susceptible of this transmutation? He is, if any body is. Can he be transferred, by virtue of a few cries and raps of a glib-tongued auctioneer? Could a pedler sell him, from his tin cart? Could he knock him off, bag and baggage, to the boldest bidder? Let us try it. No disrespect to our esteemed senior. — We test his allegation, that a man is property. If one man can be, any man can — himself, or his stately townsman, Major-General Wilson, who would most oddly become the auction platform. If a man can be property, he can be sold. If any man can be, every man can — Mr. Prentiss, Gen. Wilson, Rev. Mr. Barstow — every man. Let us try to vendue the Sentinel. Advertise him, if you please, in the Keene paper. On the day, produce him — bring him on — let his personal symmetries be examined and descanted on — his sacred person handled by the sacrilegious man-jockey, — let him be ordered to shift positions, and assume attitudes, and display to the callous multitude his form and proportions — his points, as the horse-jockey would say. How would all this comport with the high sense of personal honor, wont to be entertained by the Sentinel? How would he not encounter a thousand deaths rather than submit to it? How his proud spirit, instinct with manhood, would burst and soar away from the scene! Who bids? an able-bodied, capable, fine, healthy, submissive, contented Boy, about fifty — sound wind and limb — sold positively for no fault — a field hand — come of real stock, — faithful, can trust him with gold untold — will nobody start him? — shall we have a bid? — will nobody bid for the boy? Now we demand of our respected brother, whose honor is as sacred in our regard as in his own, what he thinks of the chattelism of a slave, — for we indignantly lay it down as an immovable principle that the Hon. John Prentiss is as legitimate a subject of property and of sale, as any the lowest of his race.

We dispose of the position that “slaves are property,” by utterly and indignantly denying the possibility of it. We will rescue our brethren of the Sentinel from the imputation of this murderous idea, by erasing the semicolon after “property,” and making but one sentence of the second “difficulty,” turning it into an opinion that “slaves are property by the constitution and the laws;” throwing the infamy on to the old framers of the constitution, and all of us who have lived under it, with power to amend or nullify it. It would sink the whole of us. Constitution and laws! Is the Sentinel of opinion that a constitution could be framed by men, or by existences in the shape of men, that, instead of protecting human liberty and rights, should annihilate them? A constitution to enslave men! What would you say of a British constitution, that enslaved a British subject? Would you not scout the idea of it — of the British possibility of it? and can it be done here, and was it done here by revolutionary sages, who could not brook the restraints of British liberty? A constitution, that should provide for the enslavement of a man, would be a legal abortion. The bare engrossing of it would nullify it. It would perish by spontaneous annulment and nullification. It could not survive its ordination — nor could its infamous framers. We deny that an enslaved man is property by the constitution, and we might deny that any man can be enslaved under our constitution, and consequently, that he could be chattelized, if a slave were admitted to be property. Things may be appropriated — persons may not. They are self-evidently not susceptible of appropriation or ownership. By the constitution every body is spoken of as a person — no mention is made of human things. If a slave is alluded to, in that instrument, as a possible existence in point of fact, it is under the name of “person.” “Three fifths of all other Persons” — “migration or importation of persons” — “no person held to service.” These are the only instances in it where allusion is made to slaves, — and it no more, in those allusions, sanctions enslaving, than it does “piracies and felonies on the high seas,” which it also expressly recognizes, as they say of slavery. So it says “person,” where it solemnly asserts that “no person can be deprived of liberty or property, but by due process of law.” This clause prohibits the slightest approaches to enslaving, or holding in slavery, which is continued enslaving. No person's property can be taken from him; not his life even; infinitely less his Liberty, without due legal process. It is idle to say, that the framers of the constitution, or. those who adopted it and acted under it, did not mean to save the colored man from slavery, by this clause. In law they are to be held to mean so, because they said so. The intent of the framers is now to be gathered from what they said in the instrument itself — not their colloquies at the time or before or after — but what they put down in imperishable black and white. It is what they inscribed on the parchment for all time, that they legally intended, and there we are to go to get at their intent. If the words are obscure and ambiguous, we may gather their intent by aid of concomitant circumstances, &c. But there is no ambiguity here. The clearest words and best understood and most trimly defined of any we have, here set forth the essential doctrine, (without which a community of thieves and pirates could scarcely be kept together,) that life, liberty and property are sacred. Enslave man and leave him these three, and you may do it, maugre this clause of the constitution. However, you must leave him, by virtue of other clauses, a few other incidentals, such as compulsory process for calling in all witnesses for him, of whatever color; the inviolate right to be secure in person, house, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures; right of trial by jury in all cases over twenty dollars' value; the free exercise of religion, of speech, of the press, of peaceable assembly and of petition; the civil rights of republican government, which is guarantied to him in every state in this Union; the privileges and immunities of citizens in every state; in short, you must allow him a string of franchises, enumerated accidentally in that part of the old compact, called the preamble, viz., justice, domestic tranquillity, common defence, general welfare, and, finally, the blessings of liberty to himself and to his posterity; — moreover you may add, in repetition, — for in securing these breath-of-life sort of rights, people run a little into superfluity of words — you may add the unsuspendible privilege of habeas corpus — the old writ of liberty; — and perfect exemption from all attainder, or enslaving a man's children on his account. We will mention one more — that is the uninfringible right to keep and bear arms. All these and many other rights and immunities, "too numerous to be mentioned,” are secured to him by adamantine provisions in the constitution, and if you can chattelize him under them, so that Austin Woolfolk can trade in him, at your capital, or Wade Hampton or the American Board, can buy him and use him up in their service, or Doctor Ezra Styles Ely speculate in his soul and body, then your doctrine, Messrs. Sentinel, is sound, that he is recognized as property by the constitution.

We claim some exceptions, however, in case we cannot overthrow slavery in the slave states, by force of the national constitution. We cannot allow you to enslave any body in old Virginia. Look at her law paramount in our caption, declaring the Birth-Right, Inalienable Liberty Of All Men. In Maryland the right is constitutionally set forth a little stronger. You must not enslave a man in Maryland, — and we can't allow you to lay a finger on his liberties in the district of Columbia, because the constitutions of Virginia and Maryland are still paramount law there, by congressional adoption, at the acceptance of the cessions. And if he runs away from the district or a territory, or either of those two states, we can't allow you to arrest him and send him back.

We ask our legal friends, who think lightly of this “fanaticism,” to look into this constitutional and legal matter of slaveholding. We would like especially, that some of the neighbors of the Sentinel would give some exposition, during the coming convention, of the lawfulness of enslaving people in this country. We ask the Keene lawyers how this is. We want “the opinion of the court.”

For ourselves we venture the opinion, in light of what glimmerings of law scintillate about our vision, that holding a man in slavery is a violation of the law of this land, and of every part of it, not excepting our gory-fingered sister Arkansas, or our carnage-dripping sister Alabama, the haunt of christian enterprise from New England and the worn-out slave states in the north. A constitution that can avail to protect republican liberty to a single member of this community, inviolably secures it to every man, and condemns and prohibits slavery. It cannot otherwise be. Slavery is a mere matter of fact — in the face of the constitution — in the face of each state constitution — in the face of every court of justice which soundly administers the law of any state — in face of every thing, but a tyrant public sentiment, and a diabolical American practice.

The enslaved of the country are as much entitled to their liberty as any of us, by the law as it is. They have a right to throw off all violation of it by force, if they cannot otherwise. Nay, it is their duty to do so, if they can, — for it is not injury merely, that they are submitting to — not wrongs. They are rendered incapable of suffering injury — incompetent to endure wrong. The accursed system, that preys upon them, makes things of them — exterminates their very natures. This they may not submit to. They ought to prevent it, at every expense. They ought to resist it, as the Christian should the devil, for it wars upon the nature of man, and devours his immortality. If they could heave off the system by an instantaneous and universal effort, they ought to do it Individually we wish they could do it, and that they would do it. We may be wrong in this opinion — but we entertain it. If our white brethren at the South were slaves, we should wish them instantaneous deliverance by insurrection, if this would bring it to them. We wish our colored brethren the same. We do not value the bodily lives of the present white generation there a straw, compared to the horrible thraldom, in which they hold the colored people, and we value their lives as highly as we do the colored people's. But insurrection can't effect it. It must be done by the abolitionists. They must annihilate the system by force of their principles, and as fast as possible. And they must increase their speed. Men will have to groan and pant in absolute brutality, with their high and eternal natures bound down and strangled amid the folds of this enslaving devil, until we throw it off. To the work then, and Heaven abandon the tardy! If you wish to save your white brethren and yourselves, we commend you to this work, in sharp earnest We tell you, once for all, there is no time to be Inst!

There is no end to the theme — there must be to this article. We deny the truth and existence of the Sentinel's two difficulties, and if, in fact, they both existed, our movement “provides for them.” The people collectively have the power to declare slavery a crime in the slave states. Congress has the power to do what amounts to the same thing — by direct action. They can declare it criminal in the capital, and how long would it be esteemed innocent elsewhere? They can punish enslaving in the district, and the man-traffic between the states as piracy. Lex talionis would enslave the perpetrators — but that would be devilish, and ought not to be inflicted. But if hanging is lawful in any case, it is in this.

If the people collectively and Congress have no legal power over the slavery of the slave states, abolitionists have the power, ample and adequate, and they will “provide for the difficulty.”

The constitution and the laws do not recognize the slaves as property. We call for the proof. The Sentinel avers it. Let them point us to the spot where. And could they do this, the abolitionists have the power (consult rule of three for the time it will take) to change and redeem both the constitution and the laws, and transmute this property back again to humanity.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 15-21 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of September 8, 1838.

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: Dr. Farmer Dead, September 1, 1838

We were amazed as well as deeply afflicted, at the death of this distinguished and most excellent man. His departure surprised us — invalid as he long has been, and feeble as was his hold on life — so insensible are we to the uncertainty and frailty of mortal existence! We have lost a highly valued personal friend, as well as our cause a faithful, devoted and invaluable advocate. We could weep for ourselves as well as for the poor slave, who does not know his loss. But it is not a time to weep. Survivors on the field do not pause in thick of the fight, to lament comrades or chieftains falling around them.

The departed Farmer lived and died a devoted abolitionist. We proclaim this amid the notes of his requiem and the tolling of his knell — in the ears of the scorner of the supplicating slave and of bleeding liberty. Admirers of his distinguished worth — his admirable industry — his capacity — his usefulness — his blameless life — who felt awed at his virtues, while he lived almost invisibly among men — mingling with the busy throng of life scarcely more than now his study-worn frame reposes in the grave — know all, and be reminded all, that Farmer was in zeal, in devotion, in principles and in measures, not a whit behind the very chiefest abolitionist. No heart beat more ardently than his, in the great cause of human rights — or more keenly felt the insults, the inhumanity and the ruffian persecutions, heaped upon its friends. How deep was his mortification at the brutal and ignoble treatment of the generous and gifted Thompson, and with what agonizing solicitude did his heart throb, as the life of that innocent and most interesting and wonderful stranger was hunted in our streets! How freely would he have yielded up his own sickness-wasted form, to save his friend! Scorners of the slave — sneerers at the negro's plea — ruthless invaders (whoever you are) of the hearth of hospitality and the sanctities of Home, we point you to the fresh grave of Farmer. To the grave of Kimball, too, his beloved brother — that young martyred heart — who still pleaded among you, unheeded but faithfully, the cause of the suffering and the dumb, when his voice was hollow with consumption — whose mild eye still beamed with remembrance of those in bonds, when lustrous with the hectic touch of death. To the grave of young Bradley too, who bowed his beautiful head to the destroyer, like the “lily of the field” surcharged with rain, remembering the down-trodden slave amid all the promises and allurements of youth and genius. And to other graves recent in your peopled church-yard, into which we should have looked with heart-broken disconsolation, but for thought of the resurrection. To these graves we point you — as you ponder on the past — not now to be recalled — registered for eternity.

Advocates of the slave too, a voice from the church-yard speaks also to you. There is neither knowledge, nor wisdom, nor device there, where the departed faithful lie, and whither you hasten. Your brothers and sisters in bondage descend thither in the darkness of brutal heathenism, from lives that know no consolation. What thy hands find to do, do with thy might.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 13-4 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of September 1, 1838.

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, September 1, 1838

“Only ye may opine it frets my patience, Mr. Osbaldistone, to be hunted like an otter, or a sealgh, or a salmon upon the shallows, and that by my very friends and neighbors.” — Rob Roy.

Whose patience has been fretted, if it had not been fret-proof, like the abolitionists’? Have they not been hunted like an otter, or a salmon among the shallows, or a partridge upon the mountains; or like David among the cliffs of Ziph and the rocks of the wild goats? And every body seems to think it is all as natural as life, and that they should bear it, and be thankful it is no worse. How they have been belied and slandered and insulted, by a stupid pro-slavery community! How church brethren and sisters have scowled upon them, and trifled with their rights and their feelings, as though they had no more of either than a “nigger!” How has the murderous scorn been extended from their poor, down-trodden — mark the phrase — down-trodden — not merely stamped upon, for once, or any given number of times, — but every time — by the common walking footstep of community, —  trodden on as universally as the path of the highway — “down trodden,” indeed! How has the scorn felt for the poor colored man, been extended to the abolitionist, and how he has borne it, with almost the “patient sufferance” of the “free negro,” or the Jew in Venice, — until sufferance is become “the badge of all our tribe.” And what avails it? “The brotherhood” have fallen into the idea, that we also are “an inferior race,” and that we are exceedingly out of our place, when we claim the common rights of humanity. As to the rights of citizenship, they do not dream that any appertain to us. See with what calm, summer-day serenity they look on, while we are mobbed. They think no more of it, than they do when a lane of “free niggers” is “smoked out” by “public sentiment” in New York or Philadelphia. Who cared for the outrages of the great Concord mob, in September, 1835? “Tremendous public excitement!” shouted the N. H. Patriot — as if another revolution had been fought Tremendous public excitement! A grand popular victory. Victory indeed it was — but over what? Over innocency [sic], humanity, the law of the land, the public peace! An odd victory to boast of.—What a “frolic after Thompson,” (or to that effect) exclaimed the merry N. H. Courier. — O, what a joke! How funny and frolicsome the people were after Thompson! How they did frisk and caper, and how masterly funny they did chase him, and surround Neighbor ——‘s dwelling-house! O, what a sportive company of them got together, and how they did surround that house by moonlight, and what a merry time on't they caused in that dwelling!

O “riddle-cum-ritldle-cum-right!

“What a time we had, that Friday night!”

He, he, he — hah, hah, hah!!!

Hung be the heavens in black. Out, moon — and hide, stars, so that ye look not on and blench your light, at sight of such scenes. “Frolic!” Was the Alton night-scene a frolic? Was the hellish-gathering about that ware-house, rendering the dun night hideous, a joke — a fracas — “an abolition frolic?”

The time will come, when these deeds will be appreciated by the people of this country. Ay, it is at hand. We wait patiently, but not silently. "The brotherhood" may fix upon us its evil eye of menace and "frolic." They shall hear of their merry doings. If we cannot speak freely, we desire not to remain on the slavery-cursed soil. We call upon the people of the land, to look to their liberties. We have no freedom of speech, no liberty of the press, no freedom of assembly. The sovereign and tyrant of the country is Slavery. He holds his court in the South, and rules the vassal North by his vicegerent the mob, — or as Hubbard Winslow preaches it, “the brotherhood.” We owe no allegiance to either. We shall pay none.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 11-3 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of September 1, 1838.

An Abolitionist to William Lloyd Garrison, December 6, 1834

South READING, Dec. 6, 1834.

MR. GARRIsoN — The numerous panegyrical notices of Mr. THoMPsoN, which had for the last two months appeared in the columns of the Liberator, had put curiosity upon tiptoe in our little village to hear this disinterested, generous and eloquent MAN of TRUTH, and ADvoCATE of LIBERTY. He favored us with his presence yesterday, and last evening lectured for the space of two hours in the Baptist meeting-house, with zealous fluency and triumphant argumentation. The audience was a large one, and highly respectable, notwithstanding the purposely slight and obscure notice of the meeting which was given by our congregational minister, who is still on the side of gradualism and expatriation. A considerable number of individuals, animated by various motives, came from the surrounding towns,—even as far as Salem,—among whom were the Rev. Mr. Grosvernor and Richard P. Waters, Esq. . The meeting was opened with singing by the choir, and prayer by the Rev. Mr. Pickett of Reading; after which, Rev. Mr. Grosvenor made a few pertinent remarks, introducing Mr. Thompson to us, in which he reminded us that American liberty was won and established partly by the valor of a foreigner – Lafayette; and that the spiritual redemption of the world was effected through the instrumentality of another foreigner — the Lord Jesus Christ.

Of Mr. Thompson's lecture I shall not attempt to give you even the outlines. The topics were so various, the arguments so profound, the illustrations so rich and appropriate, the transitions from the pathetic to the severe, and from the beautiful to the sublime, were so incessant yet natural, that my pen might as well attempt to give the sound of the mountain torrent, or mark the course of the lightning, as to state them in their order, with justice either to the subject or the orator.

Mr. Thompson in his exordium, at once secured the earnest attention of his hearers by remarking, with measured and solemn enunciation, that the question which he was about to discuss was one of immense magnitude and transcendant importance, in comparison with which, all others that are now agitating the minds of the American people, appertaining to the politics or the prosperity of the nation, dwindled into insignificance; and he trusted that he might be able to go into its discussion with that candor and faithfulness which it merited, and that his auditors would listen with unbiassed, unprejudiced, and christian minds. If he should misapprehend, or misinterpret, or misstate, in any particular whatever; if he should swerve but a hair's breadth from the line of eternal rectitude, or fail in sustaining every assertion and every proposition that he might make; he called upon every one present, who should detect him in error, to rise and expose his sophistry or his ignorance. But if he should speak understandingly — truly — with a zeal according to knowledge; if he should show that slavery in the abstract and in the concrete was wrong, and that it was emphatically a national transgression—then it became each of those before him to say with repenting Saul — “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?”

With regard to this finding something to do, which many think is so difficult a matter, Mr. Thompson asked — Do you know of any abolitionists, who are at a loss what to do for the emancipation of the slaves? Do they not say, that there are so many appropriate and important modes of action, that they are often puzzled which of them to select? Do they not exclaim — O, that our zeal, our talents, our means, our influence, were increased a hundred fold! O, that we could be here — there — every where, rebuking, encouraging, convincing and reforming a perverse and cruel people!

But, — but, — “We are as much opposed to slavery as we can be.” This hypocritical and impudent profession was most severely dealt with by Mr. Thompson, in a strain of burning satire. He interrogated those who made it, whether they remembered the slave in their prayers — in their intercourse with relations and friends? whether they contributed aught of their substance to the furtherance of the anti-slavery cause, or circulated any petitions for the abolition of slavery in those portions of territory which are under the jurisdiction of the national legislature? To which interrogation the reply uniformly was — “O, no! we have done none of these ; but then-we are as much opposed to slavery as we can be.”

The speaker then made a death grapple with those who run to the Bible to find a precedent and a plea for southern slavery, and tore them limb from limb. He nobly vindicated that precious volume, and its great Author, from the impious aspersions which had been cast upon them by the apologists of slavery, who contended that they gave full warrant for the murderous system. All those of his audience who were jealous for the honor and glory of God, and the holy repute of the scriptures, must have rejoiced in the masterly exhibition of truth which was made on this interesting occasion.

We were gratified to see you in the assembly, Mr. Garrison: and we could not but rejoice anew at the glorious fruits of your mission to England, as seen in the speedy and utter overthrow of the agent of the American Colonization Society in that country — in the increasing sympathy of British christians for the slaves in our land — in the efficient aid which they are giving to us in various channels — and particularly, and above all, in securing to us, even “without money and without price, the invaluable services of GEORGE THOMPSON and CHARLES STUART — philanthropists whose hearts burn with patriotic as well as christian love for our great but guilty republic — whose only desire is, to make us “that happy people whose God is the Lord” — and who duly appreciate and admire all that is truly excellent in our character as a people.

At the close of the lecture, Mr. Thompson again requested persons present, if there were any such, who had any difficulties yet remaining on their minds, or who were not entirely satisfied with his arguments, or who thought he had erred either as to matter of fact or of inference, to express their views or propound any questions without reserve. After a short pause, Rev. Mr. Grosvenor rose and said, that, as for himself, he had no objections to make to any thing that had been advanced by the speaker. He then alluded to the fact that, for his advocacy of the cause of the oppressed, he (Mr. Grosvenor) had lost his church and congregation in Salem; but expressed a holy resolve that come what might, he would at all times and in all places be a mouth-piece for the suffering and the dumb. His remarks, though few, were made with much feeling and firmness; after which, he pronounced a benediction upon the assembly.

As yet, I have heard but a single individual who was not pleased with Mr. Thompson's lecture, although there may be others — for

“Men convinced against their will,

Are of the same opinion still.”

He is a gradualist — a colonizationist — and, I believe, a member of an orthodox church; and he says that Mr. T. ought to have had another brickbat thrown at his head alluding to the affair at Lowell. What an amiable temper what a benevolently disposed man! what a meek and forgiving Christian!

We hope Mr. T. will visit us again shortly — but our brethren in Reading think it is their turn next.

Yours truly,

AN ABOLITIONIST.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 34-7

Nathaniel Peabody Rogers: The Convention, August 18, 1838

Thanks to our young brethren for their hearty — noble-souled committee's call. Now for obeying it. Now see if our abolitionists, who “remember those in bonds,” &c. will spend a day or two to make it manifest. We would spend time chiefly, brethren, so far as traveling expenses go. Our brethren, fortunately for the cause, have not much “property or standing.” They should not lay out much of either on the road. The grog-selling inns should receive little of anti-slavery patronage. The money is too sacred for their foul coffers. The “cold chunk,” or the johnny cake, or the saw-dust pudding, (Franklin's editorial dinner,) any thing on the road, and all the mites for the Society treasury. We have got to cure this glorious slaveholding republic of its character, and to pay all the doctors' bills, and we must spend little, very little, for confectionaries.

We echo the summons of the committee of arrangements. From our Moosehillock position we send it on, and back, to every point of compass. To none but the whole-hearted, fully-committed, cross-the-Rubicon spirits—men of more heart than “But” — who can leave home for the sake of their principles — who can deny themselves, and “lap the water, as the dog lappeth,” for their thirst. From the sea coast, the Green Mountain west, the sky-seeking north, and the New Hampshire south — old, young and mid-aged — gray bearded and beardless — the sturdy and the infirm — from all streams and all valleys, and along all hill-sides — from rich “old Cheshire,” — from Rockingham, with her horizon setting down away to the salt sea. — Strafford, from the “slide”-scarred mountains of Sandwich to the rainbow mists of the Cocheco — from Pigwacket to Winnipisseogee — Strafford of the lakes — up from old Hillsborough, where the staunch yeoman drives his team from the mouths of Piscataquog and Souhegan, up to the very springs of the Contoocook, — young Sullivan, where she stretches from Sunapee to the valley of the Connecticut, and from the falls of Walpole to the cedars of Lebanon, —  Merrimack — key-stone of the Granite State — abolitionists “of our county of Merrimack,” start at day-break for the Convention, — from where the sun sets behind Kearsarge, even to where he rises gloriously over Moses Norris’ own town of Pittsfield; and from Amoskeag to Ragged Mountains, — Coos — Upper Coos, home of the everlasting hills, send out your bold advocates of human rights — wherever they lay scattered by lonely lake or Indian stream — or “Grant,” or “Location” — from the trout-haunted brooks of the Amoriscoggin, and where the adventurous streamlet takes up its mountain march for the St. Lawrence. — Scattered and insulated men, wherever the light of philanthropy and liberty has beamed in upon your solitary spirits, come down to us like your streams and clouds: — and our own Grafton, all about among your dear hills and your mountain-flanked valleys — whether you home along the swift Ammonoosuck, the cold Pemigewasset or the ox-bowed Connecticut; from the “heights of Dorchester,” and the “vale of Hebron” — from Canaan, that land of promise to the negro student boy — and from anti-slavery Campton — come from the meadows of Alexandria — one and all abolitionists of Grafton — Lyme, the peerless town of Lyme, the native town of temperance.

Abolitionists of New Hampshire! your brethren in bondage call loudly upon you for help — they clank their chains — they rattle their fetters — they lift up the cry of despair — will you hear them? Remember what God is doing for your cause. Hark, that shout from the isles of the sea! It is the emancipation cry of the West Indies — God hath given them liberty. Their deliverance has come — He is drawing nigh to us. We shall hear Him, or perish. And if this nation is marked out for destruction, let abolitionists remember Rahab of Jericho. We are slow, brethren, dishonorably slow, in a cause like ours. Our feet should be “as hinds’ feet.” “Liberty lies bleeding.” The leaden-colored wing of slavery obscures the land with its baleful shadow. Let us come together, and inquire at the hand of the Lord what is to be done.

SOURCE: Collection from the Miscellaneous Writings of Nathaniel Peabody Rogers, Second Edition, p. 9-11 which states it was published in the Herald of Freedom of August 18, 1838.

Reverend Asa Rand to William Lloyd Garrison, Wednesday, December 3, 1834

WEDNESDAY Dec. 3, 1834.

MR. GARRIsoN — A brief and hasty sketch is all I can now send you of occurrences in our good little town of Lowell, during the visit of our invaluable friend Thompson, He came among us on invitation, to give lectures on Sabbath, Monday and Tuesday evenings of the present week. We had obtained permission of the Selectmen to occupy for the purpose the Town Hall, a room in which town meetings are held, and the use of which is usually granted, on any respectful application, for any object which is not unlawful or manifestly immoral.

On Sabbath evening, Mr. Thompson gave a splendid lecture, in which he entirely swept away the pretended support of slavery from the bible. The audience was large, and listened with delight till a late hour. They suffered no interruption, except the throwing of a large stone at a window, which was arrested by the sash and fell harmless on the outside.

Notice was given on Sabbath evening, that the lecture on Monday evening would commence at 8 o'clock; and that we would meet for discussion at half past six; Mr. Thompson extending a most respectful and friendly invitation to all who had objections to our principles or measures, to be present and state them, and to all who had inquiries, to propound them.

On Monday, the Board of Managers sent special messages, of the same purport, to gentlemen who had taken an active part in public against the formation of our Society last winter. They declined the invitation unanimously, and we had not a single objector or inquirer at the meeting, except abolitionists. This was much regretted; for anti-slavery men are anxious to have the whole subject thoroughly sifted, and every argument brought against them fairly examined, in the hearing of the people. However, we managed to have some of the most formidable objections stated, and our friend entertained the assembly by refuting them, one after another, in the most lively and entertaining manner.

Then followed a lecture of nearly two hours length, on the history of St. Domingo — that history which on so many minds is a spectre to warn them against the liberation of slaves; but which, when truly narrated, is so triumphant an example of the perfect safety of immediate emancipation even in circumstances as unpromising as can possibly be conceived. Very few left the hall till the lecture was ended, notwithstanding its length and some untoward events now to be mentioned.

In the early part of the lecture, a small company of low fellows disturbed the assembly just without the door, in the entry at the head of the stairs, by loud stamping, vociferation and hisses. This was continued at intervals for near half an hour, when peace-officers, who had been sent for, arrived, and immediately the disturbers were quiet as lambs, and continued so till the close. Some time after, three missiles were thrown at the building behind the speaker. The third or last, a large brickbat, came through the window, passed near the speaker's head and fell harmless before the audience in front of the rostrum. This missile must have been thrown with great force, to pass into the second story of a high-posted building, and fly so far from the wall. A slight change of its direction would have silenced the eloquence of our friend forever, except that the barbarity of the deed would have given, what he had already said in behalf of the oppressed, a more glorious immortality. Praised be the Arbiter of life, that he yet survives to plead for the outcasts. Nothing daunted, he spoke some time after this, and the meeting closed n peace.

But the elements of turbulence and confusion had but begun to move. Yesterday, we heard of little but ‘wars and rumors of wars;’ much that was rumor only; but too much that was real, for the honor of Lowell or of New England. The most sagacious never seriously apprehended greater disturbance on the ensuing evening. Our board of managers met early in the afternoon, who unanimously and calmly resolved to claim the protection of the Selectmen, and to proceed with the meeting. The Selectmen, like true guardians of the public welfare, had been on the alert during the day. They received our application in a very gentlemanly manner, and promised us protection to the extent of their authority. The time arrived. With Mr. Thompson, we met the Selectmen in their room adjacent to the Hall. The night was exceedingly dark; the building was approachable on all sides; and not a window had a blind or a shutter, except that behind the speaker, which had a temporary barrier on the inside which remains to-day a disgraceful monument of the infuriate temper of some men in Lowell. The Selectmen still pledged us all the aid they could render; but doubted whether it was practicable, with the preparations which time permitted, to save the assembly from violence through the windows from without. Under these circumstances, we felt it an act of discretion and humanity, without any sacrifice of principle to adjourn the meeting to 2 o'clock this afternoon at the same place. This was done, and no further violence occurred. Mr. Thompson is now giving his concluding lecture on the practical part of the subject, and I have stolen away to write lest I should be too late.

The mal-contents were not satisfied to retire home after our adjournment last evening. They re-opened the Hall, and held a sort of mobocratic caucus, though remarkably still and orderly for one of that kind. They passed, and have to-day published, resolutions, ‘deeply deploring the existence of slavery’ — most sincerely, no doubt — and saying that the agitation of the subject here is very bad — that the Town Hall ought not to be used for the purpose eand communicating this wise opinion to the Selectmen. Those officers, however, have stood firm to their duty to-day.

The meeting is closed, and my letter must go. I cannot, however, forbear to say, that the handbills and other menaces of yesterday did us much good. Many, who are not friendly to our principles, said, ‘This is no question of abolition—but whether law and order shall prevail in Lowell, or whether mobs shall rule.’ They besought us to proceed, and were ready to render us every assistance in their power. The occurrences of the week will do much for the cause of truth and liberty in our town, and you may tell the whole country that abolition in Lowell is neither dead nor wounded.

Yours truly,

A. RAND.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 30-3

Journal of Amos A. Lawrence, November 5, 1859

Old Brown convicted. He made a brief speech that was worthy of the best of the early reformers. To-day I was told that his wife was in Boston, and I went with Dr. Webb to the American House to see her. She appears well. She is a large, strong woman, good-looking, and when young she must have been handsome. She feels the loss of her two sons and the critical situation of her husband very much. She says that it is a matter of religious conviction with her husband; that he would make the same attempt again if set free. I admire the old man; but considering that three persons were killed by his party, I do not see how he can escape death, even had the occurrence been in a free State. He will be lauded by the abolitionists as a martyred hero, and he does resemble that. His death will hasten the removal of slaves from Virginia.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 132

William T. Sherman to George Mason Graham, January 6, 1860

Seminary, Friday, Jan. 6, 1860.

Dear General: Things move along so so — only twenty four cadets. Captain Walters brought his boy of fourteen years and eight months and I will receive him. Vallas is so zealous that he keeps his class nearly four hours in the section room. I may have to interfere, but for the present will leave him full scope to develop his “Method.” To-morrow, Saturday I will have a drill and afterward daily.

We had some conversation about John Sherman. You have seen enough of the world to understand politicians and the motives which influence and govern them; last night I received a letter from him, which explains his signing that Helper book.¹ He is punished well and deservedly for a thoughtless and careless act and will hereafter look at papers before he signs them. I also send you a letter he wrote me before he left home to go to Washington. Whatever rank he may hold among politicians I [know] he would do no aggressive act in life. I do think southern politicians are almost as much to blame as mere theoretical abolitionists. The constant threat of disunion, and their enlarging the term abolitionist has done them more real harm than the mere prayers, preachings, and foolish speeches of distant preachers. It is useless for men to try and make a party on any basis. The professional politician will slip in and take advantage of it if successful and drop it if unsuccessful.

The true position for every gentleman north and south is to frown down even a mention of disunion. Resist any and all assaults calmly, quietly like brave men, and not by threats. The laws of the states and Congress must be obeyed; if wrong or oppressive they will be repealed. Better to bear, etc. I don't pretend to endorse republicanism, John Sherman or anybody else but I send these letters to show that he is no abolitionist. As he is my brother, is honest, of excellent habits, and has done his duty as a son, brother, neighbor, etc., and as I believe, he will fill any post creditably I wish him success.

_______________

1 The Impending Crisis of the South: How to Meet It, published in 1857.

SOURCE: Walter L. Fleming, General W.T. Sherman as College President, p. 102-4

George S. Denison to Salmon P. Chase, November 29, 1862

(Private)

New Orleans, November 29th, 1862.

Dear Sir: — I thank you for your kind letter of the 14th inst. Whenever it is deemed expedient to put another in the place now occupied by me, I should like to be made Surveyor, as you suggest.

Naturally it will be a little painful to occupy the second place in this Custom House where I have so long been first — which I cannot help regarding as, in some sort, created by myself in the midst of great difficulties and in the face of many obstacles — now that the great labor is done and the road is becoming smooth and easy. But that is of little moment and the President and yourself are the only proper judges of what is desirable and expedient.

I cannot recompense your constant kindness to me, except by endeavoring to deserve its continuance.

Now that it seems definitely settled that an old resident of New Orleans is to be made Collector, I can, with propriety, speak to you without reserve upon this, as I always have on all other subjects. In the organization and management of the Custom House, such satisfaction has been given here, that, I have no doubt, I could have secured the appointment of Collector for myself, had I employed the usual arts of office-seekers. Such a course would have been unworthy of myself and a betrayal of the confidence you placed in me — and therefore when prominent Union men offered to use their influence in my favor, their offers were declined.

Mr. Bullitt is an old resident of this City, and is well known here as an honest and kind gentleman — thoroughly loyal — and possessing pleasant social qualities. I have, however, frequently heard Union men express two objections to his appointment, of which the first was that he possessed hardly ordinary business capacity.

The second objection is as follows. Soon after the capture of the City, a few noble men undertook to arouse and organize the Union sentiment. Among these were Mr. Flanders, Judge Heistand, Judge Howell, Mr. Fernandez and others. It was not then a pleasant thing to be a Union man, nor a leader in such an undertaking. Their families were slighted and themselves isolated. They persevered — called meetings, made speeches — organized Union associations — Union home guards, etc. These men have borne the heat and burden of the day and have redeemed this City. The result of their efforts was apparent the other night at the great Union meeting at St. Charles Theater,¹ when the thousands of members of the numerous associations were cheering Abraham Lincoln and Gen. Butler. All this time Mr. Bullitt, instead of being here to help, was in Washington looking after the loaves and fishes — and found them. For thus, Mr. Bullitt's appointment is not popular. Mr. Bouligny has also been much blamed for pursuing the same course.

In the Union movement in this City I am sorry to say that Mr. Randell Hunt and Mr. Roselius have stood aloof — especially the former. On the other hand Mr. Durant, Mr. Flanders and Mr. Rozier have done all that men could do. Mr. Durant and Mr. Rosier [Rozier] are both natives of this State, and are regarded as two of the best lawyers in Louisiana. If Senators are appointed by Gov. Shepley, Mr. Durant will probably be one, and perhaps Mr. Rozier the other.

The election of Representatives to Congress occurs on the third December. Two will be elected — one from each of the two Congressional Districts in our possession. The 1st. Dist. includes the lower half of the City and the country on this side of the River down to the Gulf. The 2nd. Dist. includes the upper half of the City and the country above and the Lafourche. In this 2nd. Dist. the candidates are Mr. Durell, Dr. Cottman and Judge Morgan. I believe they are all good men, but I can form no opinion as to the probable results of the election.

In the lower (1st. Con. Dist.) the candidates are Mr. Bouligny and Mr. Flanders. Mr. Bouligny will have the whole Creole vote and but little more. This creole population is valuable only for their votes. They are half disloyal, but took the oath to avoid confiscation. They feel but little attachment to the Government, somewhat more to the Southern Confederacy — but most of all, to Napoleon III. Unfortunately this population is large in Bouligny's District.

Mr. Flanders is the candidate of the Union Association. He did not want to run but it was urged upon him. Politically Mr. F. is an Abolitionist, but not of the blood-thirsty kind. I hope for his election. The whole real Union sentiment is in his favor. If he goes to Washington, he will let a little daylight into the darkened minds of Pro-slavery Democrats.

As an evidence of the progress of ideas I mention a remarkable resolution passed unanimously by the Union Association recently, in the lower part of the City — which was to the effect — that all loyal men, of proper age, who had taken the oath of allegiance — should be allowed to vote at this coming election. This meant negroes. Members of the Association said that a black man, who was carrying a musket for the Gov't. deserved to vote — much more than secessionists who had sworn allegiance to save their property. It seems to me, that this is too much in advance of the times. The virtuous Seymour and Van Buren have a good deal to say about Radicals. What would they say of the Union men of the South? I will inform you of the result of the election, as soon as possible after it is decided.

The expedition to the salt works (spoken of in my last) failed. The Gunboats could not get up the Bayou, and the troops could not pass through the swamps. They will have to be taken from New Iberia.

The affairs of the Dep't. of the Gulf, are managed with entire honesty, so far as I can perceive. At any rate no trade of any kind with the enemy is permitted. The pressure for permission to renew the trade, has been very great. One man offerred me $50,000 cash, for permission to take salt across the Lake. A sack of salt was worth here $1.25 — across the Lake, $60. to $100. A thousand sacks would be worth $60,000, with which cotton could be bought for 10 cts. per pound and brought here and sold for 60 cts. So that one cargo would be a great fortune. Another man wanted to bring here several thousand bales cotton, but must take back stores. He would give me one fourth of all the cotton brought hither, and there were many other cases — but they make these offers with such skill that it is impossible to get any legal hold on them. I don't know how many offers would have been made, if I had been suspected to be of easy virtue. People here think if a man has a chance to make money, however dishonorably — that he will avail himself of it, of course. I again express the hope that no trade of any kind, with the enemy, will be authorized from Washington.

_______________

¹ On November 14 Military Governor Shepley issued a call for the election of members of Congress on December 3. This Union meeting was held on the 15th of November.

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 333-6

Nathaniel P. Rogers to William Lloyd Garrison, November 17, 1834

PLYMoUTH, N. H., Nov. 17, 1834.

DEAR GARRIsoN — We were highly animated Thursday, the 13th, at a stage arrival in our little village, bearing the “honored freight, Messrs. THoMPsoN, GRosvenoR and PHELPs, fresh from the field of Convention at Concord.

To see George Thompson here among us, at some period of his beneficent sojourn, we had fondly hoped, from the moment you announced to us his intended embarkation from England. But to greet him so soon after his landing, and to hear him speak, within our own walls, while his locks were yet wet with the dews of New York hospitality, was a favor we had not anticipated. What a delicate and discerning taste, by the way, this despotic New York tavern-keeper must have, and this mobocracy of ours in general, to vent their fine courtesies upon a subject like him!  I Who that beheld George Thompson merely, could imagine that there existed a brutality, even in New-York, brutal enough to do him harm or show him unkindness? Burns tells of a Scottish lass, that the “very de'il” could not look in the face but he would cry out — “I canna wrang thee.” Our mobocracy might take lessons of civility and humanity of the bard’s “de'il, as I fear they have taken, of a spirit having other existence than in the imagination of profane poetry. I really wondered, as I gazed on the elegant and interesting stranger, that a tavern-keeper could be found in all the hog-traversed streets of our republican Babylon, of a civility so swinish as to turn him from his door, — even were it to humor the sovereign and awful caprice of a man-jockey from the south? His wife and little children, too, routed of a poor home that a tavern could yield them in a strange land, — the first night, I believe, of their respite from the sea! Shame on you, most magnanimous inn-holder! and shame on the public, that will countenance the impudent brutality.

But I set out to give you a slight account of our antislavery occasion, and the addresses of our noble friends to the good people of Grafton county. It was a capital occasion. A court session had drawn together the flower of the shire. Our fine, intellectual bar, that will rank in talent and honorable character with any in New England; — our jury pannels, the prime of the yeomanry of a temperance community; — these, with a considerable amount of merit and eminence ex officio, and the other following of a county assize, making up a pretty full representation of our local public, afforded grand materials for an anti-slavery auditory. Then we had some distinguished talent from out the county. Our ample court house, condescendingly opened to us in the evening, was filled at first ray of candle. A fair proportion of ladies graced the attendance, — the clergy from this and other surrounding towns, — and, to add dignity and interest to the meeting, gentlemen advanced somewhat in life, of high judicial station in better times than these, — now retired, — came several miles, in the air of a November evening, to countenance the occasion and hear the advocate of the Negro — gentlemen who, though not professedly abolitionists, and not altogether ready perhaps to allow the colored man his right, if it were thought immediately practicable, yet far above the vulgar prejudice against him that infects our ordinary great, and too sagacious to trifle with the black man's plea. The auditory was, on the whole, one of the finest that could be gathered, and numbered several hundreds. The Hon. S. P. Webster was prevailed on to incur the hazards of the chair... The meeting was opened by prayer from the Rev. Mr. Grosvenor — our own beloved minister being called for, but not not [sic] having reached the meeting. A hymn followed-appropriate words, set to music by an ingenious abolition neighbor, who led the singing. Bro. Phelps then offered the following resolution — if I can remember accurately, through the splendid discussion that followed — That Immediate and Entire Emancipation is the only righteous, efficient, safe or practicable remedy for American slavery; and that it was the solemn duty of every American citizen to address himself forthwith to its consummation, by every christian means. He sustained the resolution in a series of pertinent and forcible remarks for fifteen or twenty minutes; though evidently, to us who knew him, with restrained powers. He was succeeded by Mr. Grosvenor, who spoke about the same time; and though manifestly with intent mainly to pave the way for what was to come after, he rose to high and affecting strains of eloquence. He was especially happy in a comparison of the trifling causes which employed the zeal and talents of counsel in that Seat of Justice, with the unutterable wrongs of two millions and a half of clients, in whose behalf he pleaded. But he forebore, he said, to take the time belonging to his gifted friend, who was to follow him, for whom he hoped the candid hearing of the auditors, as he was sure he would have their hearts.

George Thompson rose before the hushed assembly. They did not cheer him — it is not their habit — and if it had been, they had no such welcome for the advocate of the despised Negro. We have wronged the colored man too long and too deeply to readily forgive him, or to regard with complacency the man who ventures to take up his cause. Had the orator risen for the Polander or the Greek, or in behalf of any honorable or classical suffering, the walls would have rung with enthusiastic acclamation; but it is otherwise towards the advocate of the poor, the despised, the injured, the scorned, and “him that had none to help him.” The multitude regarded him in deep silence. Slowly, solemnly, and with wonderful expression, he summoned them to the momentous importance of the subject on which he was entering, and challenged the mention of any that could hold comparison with it, as it bore on the interests of man or the weal of this nation. After a brief preliminary, he bore away into a stream of argument and eloquent appeal to which I had witnessed no parallel, and of which I can attempt no account. For an hour — it may be two hours — I could form no estimate of the time by its lapse — he held the surprised and reluctant assembly in breathless attention. I do not conjecture their emotions or convictions. There were no plaudits — no more than at the defence before Agrippa, or the reasonings before Felix. To some the orator may have seemed “beside himself” — “mad” with “much learning. Others may have “almost been persuaded.” I cannot detail his arguments, or give any — the faintest idea of his impression. I have a dazzling impression on my memory of a portraiture of American slavery — terribly graphic — an exposition of the Levittical Law, in its bearings on ancient servitude and on modern slavery — one which, I think, will forever deter all who heard it, from venturing thither for warrant or apology for the infamous system of American slaveholding — of a glance at Abraham and his household, marching to the slaughter of the kings — a train little enough resembling a gang of sullen, heavy-footed negroes, goaded to the rice swarm — and still less a coffle of chained men moving through Freedom's capital, at the sound of her national music, to a more dismal bondage in the far south. St. Paul's recapture and remanding of the fugitive Onesimus, was illustrated by a commentary that will effectually warn all our scripture-mongers, who go about vindicating this slavery (which they hate worse than the abolitionists) from the bible, against quoting again from the epistle to Philemon! The utter impracticability of gradual or partial emancipation, — the danger of indulging the captive with a lengthened chain, while you hold him still bound, — the folly of attempting a lingering release of him from his thraldrom, link by link, — and the dangers of immediate emancipation, he portrayed. From the two million and a half of butchers who would be “let loose” upon the defenceless white folks, by immediate, abolition, he begged leave to make some detachments. First, he begged to detach all the infancy. This would hardly add to the force of an insurrection. Then all the childhood, below the years tall enough to reach a throat to cut it; — then the decripit age, whose vigor had long been exhausted in slavery’s toil, and which even emancipation could not recall; — the mothers rejoicing in their children — theirs at last beyond the reach of the auctioneer and the kidnapper; — the countless band of sable youth and beauty, with modesty sacrificed and affections offered up on the altar of the white man’s shame; then the sick — a host at all times under the “tender mercies” of the system; the christians — “resisting not evil” — much less rising upon benefactors; and last and least too — the favorite slaves — the “kindly treated.” All these he would detach, and be thankful for; and against the revengeful gratitude of the residue, he commended the defenceless master to the strong arm of the law, to justice and to God. Oh, for the pen of a ready writer, to have caught his glorious refutation of the impious slander that the black man was inferior in native capacity to his oppressor! His burning reprehension of our demanding fruit from the tree to which we denied the fertility of the earth, the dew, the shower, and the sunshine; consigning it to darkness and sterility, and then scornfully demanding of it foliage and fruits! I doubt if the stenographer could have availed himself of his art to arrest his enchanting exclamations, “they could be felt, but could not be followed.” I cannot speak of his reading and comments on the fiftieth of Isaiah. Every christian ought to have come to the field upon it, as at the sound of a trumpet. He cried aloud, and he did not spare. He spoke of the south and the slaveholder in terms of christian affection — declared himself a brother to the slave-master — a fellow sinner — under like condemnation with him, but for the grace of God— of the country—its history, its great names, its blood-bought privileges, and its blood-cemented union; he spoke with thrilling and overpowering admiration, lamenting the stain of slavery upon our otherwise glorious renown. Much as I was captivated with his oratory and force, it was the sweet spirit of the christian that won most my admiration and affection, it was the spirit of the “beloved disciple” — and he comes into this guilty land not “to spy out its nakedness, or abundance, or to regard our boasted politics;[”] but in obedience to that solemn command, “Go ye into all nations;” and to the “Lo, I am with you,” we commit him, for protection against the violence of our multitudes and the councils of our chief priests and pharisees.

After he had closed, the resolution was put to the meeting for their adoption. It was read by the chairman with a feeling somewhat below the fervor of the speaker. Still, a very goodly number of hands were raised in its support, and only three were seen to go up in answer to the call for opposition. Three hands! — and these were of gentlemen-scholars — bred to the generous pursuits of learning ! Before the addresses, scarcely three, beside the few professed abolitionists, would have risen in favor of the doctrines of the resolution.

The assembly dispersed quietly and with the utmost decorum, after prayer by our beloved pastor.

Many abolitionists were confirmed, and many, I have no doubt, made at the meeting. The addresses were spoken of with universal admiration, the cause opposed with moderated and respectful tone. The result will be most happy for the cause. I have only to say that our brethren might come among us again. Another such hearing would assemble thousands, and thousands may assemble in Grafton county without danger of mobs. We have enough of honorable character among the opposition to hold our mobocracy in respectful check. I hope they will visit us again early. This county is an important section of the State. The temperance cause received some of its earliest and most powerful impulses here, and “good temperance ground is good abolition ground.”

In haste, my dear sir,-too much to retrench my long and crude letter, — I remain, truly and affectionately, yours,

N. P. ROGER.S.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 21-6

Thomas Smith* to Howell Cobb, June 27, 1848

Versailles [indiana], June 27, ’48.

Dr. Sir: Knowing the tax imposed by business, ceremony, and a little real friendship, on Members of Congress, I have refrained writing to many friends that I really wished to. Under this state of feeling I would not write you or trouble you now if I did not think and fear that a momentous political crisis was about developing that is destined shortly to shake our political fabrick. In this Confederacy the Democratic party, long in the ascendant, has had to conciliate and compromise sectional interests and feelings. In this spirit the Slavery question has been put on the ground of non-interference on the part of the Genl. Govmnt. On that basis the democratic party has planted itself. If it can maintain that position, it is the only position that it can maintain in the free states, and is there a Southern man so blind as not see it and so uninformed as not to know it?

To drive us from this ground, the Whigs and abolitionists have agitated for the last 10 or 15 years. Their denunciation of the South, Southern dictation and Southern influence, has been fierce, and their appeals have been powerful and pathetic in favour of the poor negro. To meet these arguments and such invective has required all the talent and forbearance of the Democratic party. The Democratic free-state creed commends itself strongly to the sober sense of community, and those that attempt to overturn it can't but show the incendiary's torch and the assassin's knife— “in their fury the hope of the Union is lost”. The Democratic South in our conventions, in Congress, and at the ballot box has shown the same conciliatory spirit, — in making our last and former nominations they have been foremost in favor of free-state men. But in the nomination of the present Whig candidate it is manifest to all the people, and they can't but see the finger of the South in it, and the dictatorial and domineering spirit they have shown in forcing their man upon the Convention.

It has forced some fears upon the Democrats, as well as confusion and dismay into the Whig ranks, and utter disgust into the abolition breasts. The consequence of all will be to very much widen the breach between the free and slave states of the Union. In the late Whig convention the South showed neither quarter nor respect to the North. She gave not a vote for a Northern man. . . .

But the point to which I wish to call your attention is this: the fear amongst the democratic party is that the South may so far unite on the nominal Whig candidate as to give him all the South, in disregard of the friendly spirit the free states have always shown you. If this shall be the case I cannot doubt that much democratic sympathy will be lost you, and a falling off amongst your friends in these states, that time can never cure. Because it is so plain the nomination of Taylor is a Southern Whig trick, against the feelings of the Whig party, to catch up other than Whig votes in the South, and against the sense and sentiment of the nation, that union of effort of all parties will be made against the South before his term of office, if elected, shall expire. You know that North nothing but a free-state union of effort is wanting to disfranchise the South, so far as the Presidential office is concerned; and what so well calculated to produce that result as such palpable tricks as the South has just perpetrated in the nomination of a man without talent and the independence to speak out boldly his opinions and his party fealty.

In taking such a man at such a time it must be there is something impure in it. Something behind the curtain. But it will out. If the old General shall ever be called by the people unanimously or spontaneously to the Presidency, he will find the need of opinions and fixed principles. His administration, or that of any man, must proceed upon fixed principles, and the better they are matured the better he will bear up under the responsibilities of the office.

You are aware that every Whig in Congress and out of it in all the free States in the Union by their votes, speeches and action in the primary assemblies, amongst the people, and many of the democrats, are committed to the principles of the Wilmot Proviso, and if Taylor is elected, unless they back out from their present position, which they dare not do, it will be engrafted upon the legislation of the next four years. In this great contest the South brings their General into the field unarmed. His anxiety to lead the motley forces of federalism compels him to put on the no-party badge, and to command without a sword or the armor the Constitution has put upon him for his own protection and that of the States. Mr. Jefferson says: the President's negative was given him for his own protection, the protection of the States and the judiciary, against the aggressions of Congress. But I presume as he has voluntarily divested himself of the protection the Constitution in [vested] him with, to get office, he expects to put it on in the heat and smoke of the battle. Let him not think so. If he does it, he will be shot down by his own forces and confederates; and if Tyler was denounced a traitor, he will be justly denounced an arch traitor. It is distinctly understood he will veto none of the people's measures.

Of the success of the Democratic Ticket, Cass and Butler, in this region there is no room to doubt. I have never seen in favor of any democratic ticket so ardent a spirit manifested by the party. I think in this county there is not a dissenting voice. Indiana may be set down for Cass and Butler by a large majority over all opposition. Even should Hale run, and Mr. Van Buren lead the Barnburners, we can beat them all.

I wish to know from you, my dear sir, what Georgia will do in the premises.

I have bored you with a very prosing long letter.

Our very best respects to your Lady and friends.

_______________

* Congressman from Indiana, 1839-1841 and 1843-1847.

SOURCE: Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Editor, The Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911, Volume 2: The Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens, and Howell Cobb, p. 111-3

George Thompson to William Lloyd Garrison, October 28, 1834

PoRTLAND, (Me.) Oct. 28, 1834.

MY DEAR GARRIsoN,

It is now more than a fortnight since I parted with you in Boston, on my way to the Anti-Slavery Convention at Augusta. The time has rolled rapidly away. Each day has brought with it duties and occupations, which have either absorbed the mind in the study and discussion of the “great question,” or engaged the feelings of the heart in communion with those who are nobly seeking the welfare of the oppressed. Besides the claims exerted by kind friends and solemn duties upon the heart and head, the eye has been continually arrested by some new object. Wherever I have travelled, by land or by water, I have been constantly reminded that I am in New and not Old England. The size, beauty, construction, and management of your unrivalled steam vessels: — the splendid autumnal tints of your forest foliage; — the appearance of your cities and towns, as they are seen from the deck of one of your floating palaces, as she proudly approaches the port, “walking the water like a thing of life;” — your stage coaches and tavern accommodations; — your hedgeless fields, covered with antediluvian fragments, or the stumps of hundreds of demolished trees, or plentiful crops of Indian corn and pumpkins; — the garbs and vehicles of your happy, enterprising and independent Yankee farmers; — your beautiful meetinghouses, every where visible, their modest spires directing the mind of the thoughtful traveller upward to nature's God; — All these novel and striking scenes, calculated to interest, most deeply, every intelligent stranger. In my mind they have awakened new and strong emotions. Nor have I been less affected by the more romantic portions of the scenes I have witnessed. Every thing is full of thrilling association and historical interest. Already, in imagination, I have lived a thousand years upon your soil. I have roamed the banks of the Kennebeck and the Penobscot with the Indian hunter; — I have plunged with him into your pathless woods,

“Where rang of old the rifle shot;”

have mingled with the untutored worshippers of the “Great Spirit;” — have listened to the eloquence of barbarian sages, and witnessed the deeds and death of generations, whose kindlier fate it was to ‘have their being ere science guided the white man to those shores, and the hand of an insatiate dominion commenced by the guilty work of conquest, robbery, and extermination. I have passed downwards through the bloody period of your political regeneration, and have caught a spark of genuine patriotism from off the purest altar on which its hallowed fire was ever seen to glow — the heart of Washington. I have lived through ages yet to come. I have seen this people rise like Nineveh of old; and “proclaim a fast, and put on sackcloth and ashes, from the greatest even to the least; and cry mightily to God, and turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in his hands.” I have heard the omnipotent voice of Justice thundering in the Capitol, and echoing from the Halls of Legislation in the South. I have seen exulting millions trample in the dust the galling chain of an execrated tyranny, and with uplifted hands invoke the blessing of God on a nation, that had at last broke “every yoke,” and set “the oppressed free.” But I will forbear to describe further the visions I have had of the past and the future, and return to speak of recent efforts in which I have been honored to join — efforts, to bring near the day of redemption, which, in fancy, I have already realized.

Sunday, Oct. 12. I spent this day in Portland. In the morning, I accompanied Gen. Fessenden to the meetinghouse of the Third Parish, and heard a very excellent sermon preached by the Rev. Mr. Dwight. In the afternoon I enjoyed the privilege of addressing a congregation of colored persons in the Abyssinian church. This was the first time I had ever worshipped in a place, exclusively appropriated to colored persons; nor had I ever, on any occasion, seen so many assembled together. I analyzed my mind, with some anxiety, to discern, if, in these entirely new circumstances, any feelings of prejudice or dislike were called forth. I can with truth declare, that I experienced none. The attention paid to the services was apparently deep. The deportment of all, decent and devout. The singing good; and the whole appearance of the audience that of intelligence and respectability. In the evening I lectured in the First Christian church. The audience numbered upwards of 1200. I was heard with the greatest patience and attention for upwards of two hours.

Monday, 13. Proceeded with Mr. Phelps to Brunswick, and in the evening lectured in the Rev. Mr. Titcomb's church, to a numerous and respectable auditory. The students from Bowdoin College were all present.

Tuesday, 14. Left Brunswick, and reached Hallowell about 6 o'clock.

Wednesday, 15. Went to Augusta, the Capital of this state. At 11, the Anti-Slavery Convention assembled. — I was introduced by a very kind and flattering speech from Gen. Fessenden; and on his motion, was elected a corresponding member of the Convention. In the evening, I delivered a somewhat long address. Was very hospitably entertained by the Rev. Mr. Tappan. Some remarks of mine, during the speech referred to, gave offence to a certain party in the town; and the first manifestation of their displeasure, was to visit the house of my host, about 1 or 2 o'clock in the morning, and break nine or ten squares of glass.

Thursday, 16. Attended the morning meeting of the Convention. A little before 1, was called out of the Convention by Mr. Tappan, and informed that five gentlemen were in an anti-room waiting to see me. On being introduced to them, they said that they came from a meeting of citizens, that morning held, to inform me, that my speech of the previous night, had given great offence — that I was regarded as a foreign emissary, an officious intermeddler, &c. &c. — and that, therefore, I should not be permitted to attend the afternoon sitting of the Convention, but must leave the town immediately. I returned a calm and respectful answer, declining, however, to say whether I should comply with the “Notice to quit.” At dinner, I consulted with some friends, and it was finally arranged that I should abide at Mr. Tappan's until the remaining business of the Convention was transacted, and then retire to Hallowell, the neighboring town, and lecture there in the evening. During the afternoon sitting, the Convention passed a resolution, unanimously welcoming me to this country, and recommending me to the confidence and hospitable attention of the Christian community. At 5, I bid farewell to Augusta. At 7, I lectured in the Baptist church, Hallowell, to a very numerous and attentive auditory. A number of my opponents from Augusta were present. The people of Hallowell, however, had determined, that no “foreign interference” should prevent them from hearing my address. I was therefore permitted to lecture in peace, and I have since heard, that my address produced a good impression.

Friday, 17. At 10 o'clock Mr. Grosvenor of Salem, Mr. Bacon, and myself, started for Waterville. On arriving at the College, we were very warmly greeted by Professor Newton. In the evening, I lectured in the Baptist Church to a very large auditory, including all the students from the College. The utmost attention was paid to my address, which lasted two hours.

Saturday, 18. Saw a number of the students. Received a letter and some verses, expressive of the feelings of all the students towards me, and wishing me “God speed,” in my labors in this land. The Secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society in the College, writing to Mr. Phelps, says, — “Mr. Thompson had a large congregation last evening, and our students enthusiastically admire him. His coming here, brought over ALL that remained in the College, at least.” General Fessenden of this place, who was at Waterville with me, and has two sons in the College, told me last night, that after my lecture, six students who had previously opposed the abolitionists, requested permission to sign the Constitution of the Anti-Slavery Society, and be promoters of the cause they had hitherto withstood. Thirty-nine of the students became monthly subscribers of 123 cents to the funds of the American Anti-Slavery Society, making a total of about 59 dollars a year.

Monday, 20. Brunswick. In the morning, at 12, Mr. Phelps and myself met upwards of seventy students in the College chapel, and had a familiar conversation respecting various disputed points — the students proposed questions, and we answered them. In the afternoon, at 2, we held a small meeting at the Conference Room, in the village, where we had a very interesting conversation with a select company. In the evening, at 7, I lectured in the Baptist church to a full house.

Tuesday, 21. In the morning, at eight, we met upwards of one hundred students in the College chapel, and had a second friendly discussion on various points connected with the question. They seemed exceedingly sorry that we were obliged to depart in the course of that day. At 1 o’clock, we left for Portland.

Wednesday, 22. Held a meeting in the evening in the Friends' meeting house. The place was crowded. Speeches were made by the Rev. Mr. Adams of Brunswick, Mr. Phelps, Mr. Grosvenor of Salem, and myself. There is reason to believe, that some were converted, and many others half won over.

Thursday, 23. In the afternoon, at 3, about 120 ladies assembled in the Friends’ meeting-house, and were addressed by the gentlemen named above. The ladies agreed to meet again on Saturday afternoon. I have no doubt that a flourishing society will be established among the ladies of this city. In the evening, at 7, I met the Committees of the two male Anti-Slavery Societies in this place. Mr. Phelps and myself were earnestly requested to prolong our visit, and hold meetings as often as possible. Mr. Phelps agreeing to stay as long as I would, and feeling a conviction that we might be useful, I consented to delay my departure for a few days.

Friday, 24. In the evening, Mr. Phelps and myself held a meeting in the meeting-house of the Third Parish, and delivered addresses. The audience was very numerous, respectable, and attentive.

Saturday, 25. In the afternoon, at 3 o'clock, we had a large audience of ladies in the above church. Long addresses were delivered by Mr. Phelps and myself.

Sunday, 26. In the evening, at 7, lectured in the Second Christian church. Although the weather was most inclement, the church was filled.

Monday, 27. Met the colored people in the Abyssinian church. Prayers were offered by the Rev. Messrs. Coe and Blackman; also by the Rev. Mr. Munro, colored ministers. Mr. Phelps and myself gave addresses. The attendance was exceedingly good. We pointed out to our colored brethren the great necessity of their exhibiting a pure and blameless conduct, both for their own sake and for the good of the cause of emancipation, which might be materially advanced or retarded according to the impression made upon the public mind by their public and private demeanor.

You have now before you a very brief notice of my proceedings during the last sixteen days. These days have to me been full of interest and instruction. Proofs are every where abundant, that the cause of Truth is spreading mightily. It must, I think, greatly cheer you, my dear brother, to see the principles, which, a few years ago, you advocated almost alone, and in the face of danger, persecution, and poverty, thus going forth in their omnipotence – promising soon to pervade the whole land, and pull down the strong holds of robbery and oppression. Let us go onward. God is with us. While principle is our guide, no weapon formed against us will prosper. Let us beware of “expediency.” It is the harlot on whose knees too many good and great men sleep, and are shorn of their strength.

That you may soon see the desire of your heart, in the redemption of your beloved country from the twin abominations of Prejudice and Slavery, is the prayer of

Yours, affectionately,

GEO. THOMPSON.

SOURCE: Isaac Knapp, Publisher, Letters and Addresses by G. Thompson [on American Negro Slavery] During His Mission in the United States, From Oct. 1st, 1834, to Nov. 27, 1835, p. 11-16